What Truly Matters to a Swing Voter in Zambia's Upcoming General Election: Purchasing Power

I do not claim to be a macroeconomics expert. However, I understand a thing or two about economic outcomes and why they matter to ordinary citizens like me.

It is easy to throw around economic figures and celebrate declining inflation, improved growth rates, or a strengthening local currency. Yet, as long as these changes do not translate into tangible improvements in the lives of ordinary people, many voters will remain unconvinced. This is why, when asked how things are going, many people continue to respond simply: "The economy is bad."

Dinner-time conversations in Zambia have become increasingly interesting as the country approaches the 2026 general election. Last night, I sat with two fellow voters. Like many Zambians, we are paying close attention to the messages emerging from political parties. What are they promising? What do their manifestos say? What are their campaign slogans? Most importantly, how do they intend to improve people's lives?

I argued that, among the many issues likely to influence voter behaviour, the economy will be one of the most important.

"A substantial body of political science research on economic voting suggests that voters frequently judge governments by their perceived economic performance. In many democracies, citizens reward incumbents when economic conditions improve and punish them when living standards deteriorate."

Why the economy?

Zambia is a developing country with a large youth population. Many young people face significant barriers to employment, education, and skills development. Even those who complete academic or vocational training often struggle to secure meaningful employment. Consequently, many households continue to shoulder the financial burden of supporting dependents for longer periods than expected.

This places considerable pressure on household budgets and increases voter expectations. For many citizens, elections represent an opportunity to choose leaders and policies that will improve their economic well-being. Ultimately, voters want to know whether a government can enhance their purchasing power and improve their standard of living.

The challenge for politicians is that it is difficult to persuade people that they are better off than they were five years ago if they do not feel it themselves.

Economic progress is something people experience before they believe it.

A family that struggles to pay school fees, purchase mealie meal, afford transport, or meet medical expenses may find little comfort in hearing that inflation has fallen or that the exchange rate has improved. Their judgment is shaped by daily realities, not economic reports.

This creates enormous pressure for both the ruling party and the opposition. Each must develop a message that resonates with voters and speaks directly to their lived experiences. This is where communication strategists and economic advisers become indispensable. It is not enough to cite macroeconomic indicators. Political parties must explain, in practical terms, how their policies will improve everyday life.

In political communication, this is often described as "meeting voters where they are."

The temptation, of course, is to promise more than can realistically be delivered. History offers many examples of campaign promises that generated excitement during elections but proved difficult to fulfil once governments confronted economic realities.

The danger of overpromising is obvious. When expectations are raised beyond what can reasonably be achieved, disappointment follows. In the long run, unmet promises can undermine public trust and reduce a party's chances of re-election.

As campaign season gathers momentum, voters will be exposed to a mixture of promises, narratives, rhetoric, and competing visions for the future. Some promises will be realistic. Others will be overly ambitious. Distinguishing between the two will be one of the electorate's greatest challenges.

My advice to political candidates is simple: clearly explain how your policies will improve the purchasing power of those who currently believe "the economy is bad." Show how life will become better in practical terms. Be honest about the challenges. Avoid exaggeration.

Zambia does not exist in isolation. Its economy is interconnected with regional and global economic forces. Commodity prices, exchange rates, international investment flows, debt obligations, and global economic conditions all influence domestic outcomes. Responsible leadership therefore requires balancing ambition with realism.

I am reminded of the 1991 election campaign. I recall hearing then-presidential candidate Frederick Chiluba acknowledge the country's economic difficulties and the challenges posed by high debt levels. My recollection is that he appealed for patience and time to implement reforms rather than promising immediate transformation.

Voters gave him that opportunity. They granted him a first term and then a second. Ultimately, however, they drew the line at a third term.

There is a lesson in that history.

Voters are often willing to be patient when leaders are honest about the difficulties they face. What they are less willing to accept is a gap between promises and outcomes.

As Zambia moves closer to the next general election, political parties would do well to remember that while economic statistics matter, purchasing power matters more. For many swing voters, the ultimate question will be simple:

"Am I better off than I was before?"

References

Lewis-Beck, C., & Martini, N. F. (2020). "Economic Perceptions and Voting Behavior in U.S. Presidential Elections." Research & Politics.

Lewis-Beck, M. S., & Stegmaier, M. (2000). "Economic Determinants of Electoral Outcomes." Annual Review of Political Science, 3, 183–219.

Lewis-Beck, M. S., & Paldam, M. (2000). "Economic Voting: An Introduction." Electoral Studies, 19(2–3), 113–121.

 

When Poverty Lives Next Door: Reflections on Zambia’s Hidden Divides

Sometimes I forget that I live in a developing nation. This is because my immediate surroundings do not always reveal the deep-seated poverty that exists within my country. Every now and then, however, I catch glimpses of the everyday struggles many people in my community face.

In this article, I define poverty as limited access to desirable goods, services, opportunities, and utilities required for individuals and households to achieve their full potential.

There is no public school in my community. The nearest public school is located approximately 7 kilometres away.  A few days ago, a young boy, about 11 or 12 years old, shared with me that he has not been in a classroom since the second school term began this year. He is in Grade 6 and recently changed schools. He previously attended a community school that was several kilometres away, requiring him to walk long distances every day. Recently, he was transferred to a fee-paying school. However, his parents have been unable to raise the required Zambian Kwacha (K)700. As a result, even though the school term started more than a month ago, he has still not reported to school.

Instead, he spends his days playing. When I asked whether he studies from home, he simply told me that studying at home is difficult.

Not far from my home, I often encounter a family drawing water from a neighbouring residential property. They are a caretaker family living in an incomplete house without running water, ablution facilities, or even windows. Consequently, they rely heavily on the goodwill of neighbours for water and basic support.

The household depends on basic energy sources for cooking, including firewood. The single mother, who heads the household, survives partly through petty trading and selling illicit brew. Most of the time, the home doubles as a shebeen. The children frequently remain nearby while patrons consume the illicit brew, a homemade spirit commonly known as kachasu. Meanwhile, the caretaker house sits among homes surrounded by walls, equipped with solar panels, running water, and electricity. These homes also have school-age children, many of whom attend private schools and are driven to school each day.

Thus, within the same community, impoverished households coexist alongside relatively better-off households.

This aspect of Zambian life transcends neighbourhoods and extends into the rural-urban divide. For some rural families, the challenge is not only material deprivation but also educational exclusion.

Recently, I heard an interesting story from a teacher working in a rural posting. He has served in the community for more than ten years and understands many of the social realities affecting local residents. He shared the story of one of the wealthiest individuals living near his duty station.

The man is a farmer who has worked the land for many years. Although he has accumulated considerable material wealth, including livestock, vehicles, and other assets, he has never attended school. He owns fertile land and produces bumper harvests. Yet he still requires assistance when writing documents because he cannot read or write. More surprisingly, he has never opened a bank account.

I found this story particularly intriguing because it served as a stark reminder that poverty is relative and multidimensional.

Much of the time, discussions about poverty focus primarily on material deprivation. However, it is equally true that some people grow up in environments where they can generate wealth but still lack opportunities to develop other capabilities such as literacy.

Ironically, this man, despite owning considerable property, has long expressed frustration about his circumstances. His limited formal education has constrained his ability to interact confidently with formal institutions. As a result, he keeps his money at home rather than in financial institutions. His lack of access, confidence, and familiarity with formal systems has prevented him from becoming formally banked.

Ultimately, this represents a loss not only for him but also for the wider economy, because resources that remain outside formal financial systems are less likely to contribute to broader economic activity.

These personal stories mirror the experiences of many Zambians today.

Zambia continues to face significant inequality challenges. The country’s Gini coefficient, a common measure of inequality where higher values indicate greater inequality, was estimated at approximately 51.5 in recent years, reflecting persistently high levels of income inequality.

Similarly, literacy indicators reveal important disparities. While adult male literacy nationally is estimated at between 87% and 91%, substantial differences persist between rural and urban populations, with rural communities continuing to face educational disadvantages that affect long-term economic participation.

The rural-urban divide remains real. Some materially wealthy people in rural communities may still experience forms of deprivation because of inadequate infrastructure, limited public utilities, and restricted access to educational opportunities. These limitations reduce their ability to participate fully in the broader economic life of the nation.

As Zambia develops, equitable allocation of public resources will remain central in addressing systemic inequality and ensuring a fair distribution of scarce resources. This is essential if the country is to break cycles of intergenerational poverty.

It would be a tragic outcome if the young boy who is currently not attending school because his parents cannot yet pay school fees eventually becomes the older wealthy man who quietly mourns his inability to read and write.

Perhaps the greatest tragedy is not poverty itself, but the reproduction of poverty across generations despite economic growth occurring around us.